Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Vimal Pukhraj Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Vimal Pukhraj Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Multiple Notices in Short Span + Covid Hospitalisation = Reasonable Cause: ITAT Deletes Penalty u/s 272A(1)(d)- Penalty Cannot Be Mechanical: ITAT Mumbai Quashes ₹50,000 Levy Assessee filed an appeal before Tribunal against the order of CIT(A) wherein penalty of ₹50,000 levied u/s 272A(1)(d) was confirmed for alleged non-compliance to statutory notices. Assessee contended that delay in filing appeal of 807 days was due to genuine & bonafide reasons, as the accountant handling tax matters had left the job & new accountant later discovered that...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Technical Glitch in Form 26A Filing Cannot Trigger Section 40(a)(ia) Disallowance: ITAT Bangalore Form 26AS Alone Cannot Decide Taxability of FD Interest: ITAT Bangalore Entire Bogus Purchases Not Taxable If Sales Accepted; Only Profit Taxable: ITAT Bangalore Bangalore ITAT Reaffirms that Transfer Pricing Adjustment Must Be Restricted Only to International Transactions with AEs Reassessment Quashed as New Allegations Exceeded Section 148A Proceedings: Karnataka HC View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031